Guardian Interview - Louis van Gaal: ‘I thought Manchester United could buy every player'

Roboc7

Full Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2014
Messages
6,562
All the team above ours actually had mobile midfielders. Only ours and Chelsea didn't, especially after Ramirez regressed/left but while Van Gaal kept us competing, Mourinho almost relegated Chelsea.
LVG bought Bastian so he obviously didn’t want mobile midfielders. Didn’t realise you could almost be relegated in December with a team in 16th place.

When LVG was failing to compete, Mourinho had been sacked and instead of almost relegating Chelsea he more accurately he was actually negotiating getting LVG ’s job.
 

Kaglish10

Full Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2019
Messages
976
The thing though it didn't seem that LVG liked Herrera. I am sure Herrera was a hard working team player even in training though and always fighted hard. A good pro no doubt, but LVG never seemed to have rated him a lot.
Even though he often played very well in the big games against City and Liverpool in particular with his pressing and ability to play at high tempo.

The reason we did think that LVG didn't like him was due to playing too fast and also taking too many risks. LVG liked his passing to be safe and tactical.
Herrera was hardworking but just wasn't good enough. He's at his best being a facilitator in the midfield while other players take the dominant role like he had with Pogba and Matic but while Pogba and Matic weren't here, he was the midfielder that small opposition teams tend to mark because they had thought he was our best midfielder whereas he wasn't hence he was always horrible while in possession. I could still recall the Westham game but against top opposition, his intensity and workhorse were welcomed in the midfield. Still the same today but while under Van Gaal, we played a possession based style. He's like a high intensity Cleverley. It wasn't because he played too fast or anything.
 

Kaglish10

Full Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2019
Messages
976
LVG bought Bastian so he obviously didn’t want mobile midfielders. Didn’t realise you could almost be relegated in December with a team in 16th place.

When LVG was failing to compete, Mourinho had been sacked and instead of almost relegating Chelsea he more accurately he was actually negotiating getting LVG ’s job.
The keyword is "almost" which he did while at Chelsea in the same "weak" league you claimed.
 

SilentWitness

ShoelessWitness
Staff
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
30,143
Supports
Everton
Falcao was unfit throughout. Shaw got injured and it's not like Shaw is even that good to begin with. Van Gaal didn't even sign Shaw.

Schneiderlin is even struggling at your club, Everton as we speak yet you expect him to be worldie while he was at Manutd?

Di Maria wasn't settled because he didn't want a move to Manutd but PSG which only fell through in the last minute due to PSG's FFP problem.
Van Gaal was manager when Luke Shaw was bought. The title does not say anything about how players performed at United but about United buying players. The players he signed were top youngsters or Top PL players in their own right at the moment of their signing. The club backed him in the signing of some big players and for relatively big fees too for the time period.
 

JPRouve

can't stop thinking about balls - NOT deflategate
Scout
Joined
Jan 31, 2014
Messages
65,354
Location
France
I think he was deluded if he really thought United could just go out and buy top players at the best clubs in the world. We're not Real Madrid. I don't have issues with your comment though.
Pretty much, it's as if they don't realize that other clubs also have money and their players aren't sitting next to the phone in the hope that United calls. When you play for Bayern or Barcelona, you most likely don't give a damn about joining United, even when SAF was around, these clubs are as big as United.
 

SilentWitness

ShoelessWitness
Staff
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
30,143
Supports
Everton
Falcao was so bad I have trouble remembering he wasn't an emoji who got the odd game.
Prior to United signing and his injury he was excellent. United he fell apart and then he pulled it back together once he left United. Dunno why people are revising the fact that before United, Falcao was an incredible striker.
 

Roboc7

Full Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2014
Messages
6,562
The keyword is "almost" which he did while at Chelsea in the same "weak" league you claimed.
Yes that is the key word because you can’t almost be relegated when you aren’t in the relegation zone and there are 22 games left to play. One of the reasons it was a weak league was because Jose imploded and Chelsea collapsed.
 
Last edited:

Red_toad

Full Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2010
Messages
11,587
Location
DownUnder
Not entirely sure what the definition of "fully supported" is, but last time I checked we signed players for £250mill (including Falcao's loan deal) in his two years at the club. 13 first team players, apart from Valdez the majority were meant as players going into the starting 11.

Not fully supported, eh ?
His words not mine. He didn’t get the players he wanted, he had to make do with what he got. Similar comments from Jose and Moyes. Can’t all be coincidence. Does very much look like we buy who Ed or whoever makes those decisions wants, not necessarily the Managers choices. Backing a manager isn’t just financial, you have to support their decisions. But feel free to carry on with the old oh but look what we spent stuff. We’re currently -£6 million during Ole’s tenure at the club, plus numerous players wages off the books.
 

Kaglish10

Full Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2019
Messages
976
He has a very poor understanding of the bigger pictures and how to adapt though. Also do not have a great eye for players and that is why his transfer record is so bloody poor.

He has a very rigid tactical possesion style which sometimes can work well and I do think he is good at teaching his players to play his style. Even in pre season we could see his influence on the way we playedSimilar to del Bosque and Benitez. It is quite dull, but can work with the right set of players. The problem is when he got the wrong types of players for his style he just keeps on going without adapting that style.
There's little you can do with sluggish ageing lethargic non creative midfielders he had in his midfield.

What you see is what you get.
 
Last edited:

JPRouve

can't stop thinking about balls - NOT deflategate
Scout
Joined
Jan 31, 2014
Messages
65,354
Location
France
His words not mine. He didn’t get the players he wanted, he had to make do with what he got. Similar comments from Jose and Moyes. Can’t all be coincidence. Does very much look like we buy who Ed or whoever makes those decisions wants, not necessarily the Managers choices. Backing a manager isn’t just financial, you have to support their decisions. But feel free to carry on with the old oh but look what we spent stuff. We’re currently -£6 million during Ole’s tenure at the club, plus numerous players wages off the books.
That's not what he said and if the players that the manager want aren't available there is nothing that you can do about it.
 

Kaglish10

Full Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2019
Messages
976
Yes that is the key word because you can’t almost be relegated when you aren’t in the relegation zone and there are 22 games left to play. One of the reasons it was a weak league was because Jose imploded and Chelsea collapsed.
:lol: So convenient to say Mourinho imploded when he even had a better squad than us. Well, Van Gaal didn't implode even with a lesser squad.
 

Roboc7

Full Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2014
Messages
6,562
:lol: So convenient to say Mourinho imploded when he even had a better squad than us. Well, Van Gaal didn't implode even with a lesser squad.
That’s only thing your interested in Jose v LVG, season before not such a good comparison for you though. Only convenience is it allows you to convince yourself LVG was great and pretend Chelsea were almost relegated.
The league as a whole was weak, Leicester and Ranieri won it, he managed to turn a bottom half team into Champions whilst LVG went backwards.
 

Kaglish10

Full Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2019
Messages
976
That’s only thing your interested in Jose v LVG, season before not such a good comparison for you though. Only convenience is it allows you to convince yourself LVG was great and pretend Chelsea were almost relegated.
The league as a whole was weak, Leicester and Ranieri won it, he managed to turn a bottom half team into Champions whilst LVG went backwards.
Leicester weren't weak. They had Kante who was highly mobile and defensively astute and was the player who constantly started Leicester's counter attack after winning the ball. His combination with Mahrez after winning the ball, was often deadly. They had Vardy who was a clinical striker, Mahrez completed the creative piece. All these three players would slot seamlessly into Van Gaal's team that lacked pace, creativity and a mobile striker until Rashford emerged in February. They also had Morgan who was imperious at the back alongside Huth and fusch who were decent players and were high in confidence. The likes of Drinkwater, Simpson completed the decent players they had. They also had a good goalkeeper. Leicester deserved their league win. If it was a weak league, the likes of City wouldn't be struggling also.

Like I said, Chelsea had better squad than us. The likes of Hazard, Costa were world-class players who would slot into our attack. Likewise Fabregas and Matic who were solid decent players to have in the midfield and were far better than what we had. Mourinho even had the luxury of Salah and de bruyne but he let them go.
 

Roboc7

Full Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2014
Messages
6,562
Leicester weren't weak. They had Kante who was highly mobile and defensively astute and was the player who constantly started Leicester's counter attack after winning the ball. His combination with Mahrez after winning the ball, was often deadly. They had Vardy who was a clinical striker, Mahrez completed the creative piece. All these three players would slot seamlessly into Van Gaal's team that lacked pace, creativity and a mobile striker until Rashford emerged in February. They also had Morgan who was imperious at the back alongside Huth and fusch who were decent players and were high in confidence. The likes of Drinkwater, Simpson completed the decent players they had. They also had a good goalkeeper. Leicester deserved their league win. If it was a weak league, the likes of City wouldn't be struggling also.

Like I said, Chelsea had better squad than us. The likes of Hazard, Costa were world-class players who would slot into our attack. Likewise Fabregas and Matic who were solid decent players to have in the midfield and were far better than what we had. Mourinho even had the luxury of Salah and de bruyne but he let them go.
No idea why you have turned it into being all about Jose. It was a weak league because the usual contenders were all so poor for a variety of reasons. Spurs and Arsenal fans lament it for that reason, LVG couldn’t even get close to Leicester.

You can try and drag Jose into it all you want but it’s not relevant he was one of reasons it was weak as was LVG. Surprised you haven’t said LVG ‘almost’ won it as were top at similar time Jose was ‘almost’ relegating Chelsea.
 

Grande

Full Member
Joined
Jun 22, 2007
Messages
6,205
Location
The Land of Do-What-You-Will
Ultimately Woodward is the one responsible, but it's somewhat naive to think that the little fecker just sat down in his office and googled his way to Van Gaal and Mourinho all on his own. Plenty of people were consulted and involved in making that decision.
I should think that was obvious. Hopefully Ed Woodward consulted people he chose to consult, listened to advice he thought worthy of listening to, and made a decision based on that. And the results are what we have seen.
 

Kaglish10

Full Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2019
Messages
976
No idea why you have turned it into being all about Jose. It was a weak league because the usual contenders were all so poor for a variety of reasons. Spurs and Arsenal fans lament it for that reason, LVG couldn’t even get close to Leicester.

You can try and drag Jose into it all you want but it’s not relevant he was one of reasons it was weak as was LVG. Surprised you haven’t said LVG ‘almost’ won it as were top at similar time Jose was ‘almost’ relegating Chelsea.
This is funny. You said Arsenal, Spurs, Chelsea and City were poor but we also had a poor squad, so how did you expect us to compete with such a poor squad? It's even ridiculous when you realise that Rashford who emerged in February was one of our better players.
 

Paul_Scholes18

Full Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2014
Messages
13,891
The players that were at Bayern (Muller, Badstuber), Ajax (Seedorf, Davids, Kluivert etc.), Barcelona (Iniesta, Xavi, Puyol) and United (Rashford, Fosuh Mensah) were youngster that he took from the respective youth academy's.

You should've seen Depay at PSV and Lyon, he's still absant in some games, but there's no question about his ability.
This could indicate that he got lucky at Ajax getting youth player that gave him the wins and reputations to get big jobs. It is possible that he improved some of these players, but also that they had great qualities independent on LVGs management. His eye for talent is clearly poor, but in terms of tactically improving the players he got he seem to be pretty good. Although granted his tactical style is crap in the modern game, but he could still teach the players important details independent on his style.
 

Member 93275

Guest
This could indicate that he got lucky at Ajax getting youth player that gave him the wins and reputations to get big jobs. It is possible that he improved some of these players, but also that they had great qualities independent on LVGs management. His eye for talent is clearly poor, but in terms of tactically improving the players he got he seem to be pretty good. Although granted his tactical style is crap in the modern game, but he could still teach the players important details independent on his style.
Always such black&white drama when discussing managers. No he is not an idiot who stumbled his way into jobs at Ajax, Barca, Bayern and United, winning many prices, while not being able to distinguish a good player from a bad one. Yes he failed at United.
 

Paul_Scholes18

Full Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2014
Messages
13,891
Leicester weren't weak. They had Kante who was highly mobile and defensively astute and was the player who constantly started Leicester's counter attack after winning the ball. His combination with Mahrez after winning the ball, was often deadly. They had Vardy who was a clinical striker, Mahrez completed the creative piece. All these three players would slot seamlessly into Van Gaal's team that lacked pace, creativity and a mobile striker until Rashford emerged in February. They also had Morgan who was imperious at the back alongside Huth and fusch who were decent players and were high in confidence. The likes of Drinkwater, Simpson completed the decent players they had. They also had a good goalkeeper. Leicester deserved their league win. If it was a weak league, the likes of City wouldn't be struggling also.

Like I said, Chelsea had better squad than us. The likes of Hazard, Costa were world-class players who would slot into our attack. Likewise Fabregas and Matic who were solid decent players to have in the midfield and were far better than what we had. Mourinho even had the luxury of Salah and de bruyne but he let them go.
It was the weakest league in the last 10-15 years. Yes Leicester had a really good season and they did build up momentum to win it. Although there were not a massive super team. All other teams did struggle big time. We also got knocked out from one of the easiest CL groups. Arsenal was pretty normal under Wenger I guess. Decent top 4 contender, but nothing more and without the right mentality to win the league. Spurs was starting to improve under Poch, but still a work in progress and bottlers. City had insane problems. If de bruyne and Aguero had avoided injuries they might have done better, but overall the squad was getting old and poor. Playing yaya Toure was a joke and something all the opponents liked to see. With De bruyne and Aguero playing though they still had the best attack in the league.
Chelsea and Liverpool had terrible league seasons even if Liverpool did well in the cups after Klopp joined. Bilic with Payet for West Ham did pretty well at times, but far from a great side.

In terms of getting a league win it would be the ideal weak league to play in (Leicester took it and all cred to them). I would be pretty confident in Ole getting a league win if he could play against the same sides next season.
 

Kaglish10

Full Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2019
Messages
976
This could indicate that he got lucky at Ajax getting youth player that gave him the wins and reputations to get big jobs. It is possible that he improved some of these players, but also that they had great qualities independent on LVGs management. His eye for talent is clearly poor, but in terms of tactically improving the players he got he seem to be pretty good. Although granted his tactical style is crap in the modern game, but he could still teach the players important details independent on his style.
He got lucky by choosing to play the likes of Alaba, Badstuber, Kroos and even Muller ahead of Ribery? Or played Rashford at the expense of the ageing Rooney being forced into the midfield? or promoted Xavi and continued with him despite not still inconsistent at the time? He definitely knows quality players and those who aint worth his time if given players to select from a pool of talent, however there was no way he could have known a particular player wasn't good enough after seeing him once or twice, like in the case of Rojo who was signed because he looked good against his Dutch team at the world cup.
 

Paul_Scholes18

Full Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2014
Messages
13,891
Always such black&white drama when discussing managers. No he is not an idiot who stumbled his way into jobs at Ajax, Barca, Bayern and United, winning many prices, while not being able to distinguish a good player from a bad one. Yes he failed at United.
In my view he failed in all jobs outside the netherlands looking at the bigger picture. Given how good Barca and Bayern were and should be he didn't have a great record with them overall even if he did well some seasons.

Granted I don't have full insight into Ajax 1995 and how important LVG was in it. He probably did a great job there which is how he got his other jobs generally speaking, but his arrogance and stubborness made it harder for him to adapt after that. Add his lack of an eye for talent. The thing is there might also be other stronger factors behind that sucess than LVGs management. Given how people give him credit for stupid things which I know is bullshit about United they could do the same about a past when he had some luck. For me he is a very average manager with big flaws from everything I have seen since his Bayern days which is when I have followed him more closely.

I give him that he understands how bloody good Robben has been. One of my favorite players who has always been very underrated in my view. I think Real letting him go to Bayern was very stupid and yes credit for LVG going for him before anyone else (him being dutch probably helped). Him and Ronaldo would have beeen deadly for them together.
 

Kaglish10

Full Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2019
Messages
976
It was the weakest league in the last 10-15 years. Yes Leicester had a really good season and they did build up momentum to win it. Although there were not a massive super team. All other teams did struggle big time. We also got knocked out from one of the easiest CL groups. Arsenal was pretty normal under Wenger I guess. Decent top 4 contender, but nothing more and without the right mentality to win the league. Spurs was starting to improve under Poch, but still a work in progress and bottlers. City had insane problems. If de bruyne and Aguero had avoided injuries they might have done better, but overall the squad was getting old and poor. Playing yaya Toure was a joke and something all the opponents liked to see. With De bruyne and Aguero playing though they still had the best attack in the league.
Chelsea and Liverpool had terrible league seasons even if Liverpool did well in the cups after Klopp joined. Bilic with Payet for West Ham did pretty well at times, but far from a great side.

In terms of getting a league win it would be the ideal weak league to play in (Leicester took it and all cred to them). I would be pretty confident in Ole getting a league win if he could play against the same sides next season.
Vardy, Mahrez, Kante, Kasper, Morgan were players who would slot into any winning side. They were really good players. Heck, Mahrez, Kante and Vardy would slot seamlessly into our starting 11 under Van Gaal.
 

Roboc7

Full Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2014
Messages
6,562
This is funny. You said Arsenal, Spurs, Chelsea and City were poor but we also had a poor squad, so how did you expect us to compete with such a poor squad? It's even ridiculous when you realise that Rashford who emerged in February was one of our better players.
You think the squad was poor, well guess what LVG played a big part in that. Why did it take every striker being injured (including Will Keane) for Rashford to be introduced. He could have done dozens of things better/differently from small to big decisions during his entire tenure.

The structure at the club has let all the managers post SAF down but all those managers have made bad choices and played their part in the demise.

At the end of the day that’s why this interview is boring, let’s hear about his mistakes, regrets and things he wish he’d done differently as well as the issues at the club. This is what managers do but it’s dull, Moyes got a once in a lifetime opportunity, blew it and still insists he’d do same thing all over again.
 

Kapardin

New Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2017
Messages
9,917
Location
Chennai, India
In terms of getting a league win it would be the ideal weak league to play in (Leicester took it and all cred to them). I would be pretty confident in Ole getting a league win if he could play against the same sides next season.
Yep, I always thought that was a missed opportunity. If we had Mourinho during that season, I reckon he would have won the league even if we played shite football under him. Of course, it wouldn't have solved our current problems, but a recent league win would have gone some way in keeping us relevant as a top team despite our decline.

That LvG made us finish 5th in that Mickey Mouse season speaks a lot about his incompetence really. And unlike Chelsea, Arsenal, Spurs, Liverpool and City who were all having some problems or transition phases due to valid reasons, LvG had one season under his belt and an active transfer window to prepare and he still managed to feck it up.
 

Paul_Scholes18

Full Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2014
Messages
13,891
Vardy, Mahrez, Kante, Kasper, Morgan were players who would slot into any winning side. They were really good players. Heck, Mahrez, Kante and Vardy would slot seamlessly into our starting 11 under Van Gaal.
Don't agree with Morgan at all. I think Kante is gold though particular for a weaker teams like Leicester where his defensive job might be needed even more than in a big team. Not sure he would have done much for us under LVG since he is not a possesion player even if he would have better than Morgan and Bastian 100% and helped shield Carrick. Vardy on the counter would not suit us the same way he suits Leicester, but would have been an improvement over Rooney. Mahrez could be great and needed, but given how LVG ruined Di Maria I am not 100% sure he would have fully worked. We have seen him under Pep not fully working out either and Pep generally makes most players tick.
 

Kaglish10

Full Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2019
Messages
976
You think the squad was poor, well guess what LVG played a big part in that. Why did it take every striker being injured (including Will Keane) for Rashford to be introduced. He could have done dozens of things better/differently from small to big decisions during his entire tenure.

The structure at the club has let all the managers post SAF down but all those managers have made bad choices and played their part in the demise.

At the end of the day that’s why this interview is boring, let’s hear about his mistakes, regrets and things he wish he’d done differently as well as the issues at the club. This is what managers do but it’s dull, Moyes got a once in a lifetime opportunity, blew it and still insists he’d do same thing all over again.
Because only him would have included an unproven Will Keane as part of his fowards in the first place. This is even getting more ridiculous the more I think about it. Will Keane and Rashford were no different as regard to being unproven inexperienced kids yet you undermine Van Gaal bringing in Rashford into the team because Keane got injured. How are they different from each other? If Van Gaal had an unproven young Keane in his plan, why wouldn't he do same with any other young players after Keane got injured?

Funny enough, Mourinho had the same situation while at Chelsea and would rather deploy Hazard as a striker and couldn't be bothered with Lukaku let alone Chelsea's academy young kids but Van Gaal didn't only had plan for an unproven Keane but also Rashford after Keane got injured.

Van Gaal had got his mistakes which was his recruitment but not all his recruitment were bad and if the board had got him Mane, we could have had it better regardless of our sluggish ageing midfield.
 

Aloysius's Back 3

New Member
Joined
May 21, 2018
Messages
2,770
Even though the tactics are different - an Old Trafford legend like Ole is trying to improve the players LVG tried to improve or progress.

Jose on the other side did the complete opposite, reducing the importance of certain players whilst increasing his own.

Back to square one now with Ole.

I never understood why our fans wanted Jose so much. A short term manager. How important was targeting Zlatan, Matic, Perisic & Willian really going to be for us.
 

Kaglish10

Full Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2019
Messages
976
Don't agree with Morgan at all. I think Kante is gold though particular for a weaker teams like Leicester where his defensive job might be needed even more than in a big team. Not sure he would have done much for us under LVG since he is not a possesion player even if he would have better than Morgan and Bastian 100% and helped shield Carrick. Vardy on the counter would not suit us the same way he suits Leicester, but would have been an improvement over Rooney. Mahrez could be great and needed, but given how LVG ruined Di Maria I am not 100% sure he would have fully worked. We have seen him under Pep not fully working out either and Pep generally makes most players tick.
Di Maria already regressed as a winger before he came to Manutd. His best season, which was just 6 months was a left sided box-box midfielder for Madrid. Coupled with the fact that he didn't want to be here in the first place and the burglary theft was the final straw for him hence you couldn't say it was Van Gaal who ruined him. He isn't pulling up trees at PSG despite having the luxury of Verratti constantly releasing him on the left. The likes of Martial, Rashford Robben and Muller weren't ruined under Van Gaal, were they?

Btw, Morgan was as good as Smalling during Leicester title run in. He's got the same weakness as Smalling but he was defensively solid.
 

Roboc7

Full Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2014
Messages
6,562
Because only him would have included an unproven Will Keane as part of his fowards in the first place. This is even getting more ridiculous the more I think about it. Will Keane and Rashford were no different as regard to being unproven inexperienced kids yet you undermine Van Gaal bringing in Rashford into the team because Keane got injured. How are they different from each other? If Van Gaal had an unproven young Keane in his plan, why wouldn't he do same with any other young players after Keane got injured?

Funny enough, Mourinho had the same situation while at Chelsea and would rather deploy Hazard as a striker and couldn't be bothered with Lukaku let alone Chelsea's academy young kids but Van Gaal didn't only had plan for an unproven Keane but also Rashford after Keane got injured.

Van Gaal had got his mistakes which was his recruitment but not all his recruitment were bad and if the board had got him Mane, we could have had it better regardless of our sluggish ageing midfield.
Remember Mane turned us down after speaking to LVG that ones on him, maybe there were plenty of others he couldn’t convince as well.

Your saying Rashford was one of our best players and what could LVG differently, well he could have introduced Rashford earlier without injuries, he could have assessed he was better then Will Keane (failure to do that probably explains some of other mistakes).

At the end of the day this club is about more than LVG and Jose probably best you forget about both, ditch the love/hate obsession and move on. They both failed, both and sacked and neither will be back.
 

Aloysius's Back 3

New Member
Joined
May 21, 2018
Messages
2,770
Because only him would have included an unproven Will Keane as part of his fowards in the first place. This is even getting more ridiculous the more I think about it. Will Keane and Rashford were no different as regard to being unproven inexperienced kids yet you undermine Van Gaal bringing in Rashford into the team because Keane got injured. How are they different from each other? If Van Gaal had an unproven young Keane in his plan, why wouldn't he do same with any other young players after Keane got injured?

Funny enough, Mourinho had the same situation while at Chelsea and would rather deploy Hazard as a striker and couldn't be bothered with Lukaku let alone Chelsea's academy young kids but Van Gaal didn't only had plan for an unproven Keane but also Rashford after Keane got injured.

Van Gaal had got his mistakes which was his recruitment but not all his recruitment were bad and if the board had got him Mane, we could have had it better regardless of our sluggish ageing midfield.
Van Gaal said that he kept a low squad so he has opportunities to give the youngsters.

People have forgotten the injury crisis of December the second year & he gave the chance to Rashford.

I don't see why just because LVG used a random approach to using kids - pick and choose - that it was a bad thing. He was only ever planning to be there for 3 years before giving the job to Giggs so it would have been useless to wait just for the right youngster to turn up one day - it might have never happened. Whilst no on rates Rashford now (because of Jose, his tactics & his tenure) - LVG would have most probably unearthed another the following season whilst improving players like Rashford & others at home.
 

Roboc7

Full Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2014
Messages
6,562
Van Gaal said that he kept a low squad so he has opportunities to give the youngsters.

People have forgotten the injury crisis of December the second year & he gave the chance to Rashford.

I don't see why just because LVG used a random approach to using kids - pick and choose - that it was a bad thing. He was only ever planning to be there for 3 years before giving the job to Giggs so it would have been useless to wait just for the right youngster to turn up one day - it might have never happened. Whilst no on rates Rashford now (because of Jose, his tactics & his tenure) - LVG would have most probably unearthed another the following season whilst improving players like Rashford & others at home.
He admitted in this interview the standard of youngsters coming through wasn't good enough so leaving space for them and relying on a random approach isn't really an impressive plan. Fact he didn’t rate the players didn’t bode well for them getting opportunities unless there was another injury crisis and explains why he dropped them as quickly as they got debuts.

I wouldn’t label it a bad thing necessarily but he could of done a much better job or assessing and managing the squad.
 

pascell

Full Member
Joined
Aug 3, 2012
Messages
14,113
Location
Sir Alex Ferguson Stand
Great read, basically says the reasons or the people why we'll never give full authority to a DoF/Technical Director and those are Woodward and Judge.

Hell, they even went and signed players LvG didn't want.
 

Majima

Full Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2016
Messages
4,038
Location
Kami's Lookout
Supports
Ralf Rangnick.
Even though the tactics are different - an Old Trafford legend like Ole is trying to improve the players LVG tried to improve or progress.

Jose on the other side did the complete opposite, reducing the importance of certain players whilst increasing his own.

Back to square one now with Ole.

I never understood why our fans wanted Jose so much. A short term manager. How important was targeting Zlatan, Matic, Perisic & Willian really going to be for us.
Yep, Mourinho undone all the good work Van Gaal achieved with our young players. People wanted to believe he could bring a title back somehow. But he was never going to catch City with those players. We would have been much better off allowing him to develop the young players more in hindsight.

Who knows what other young players he would have unearthed. Martial & Rashford would have developed much more too.

It made both their tenures a waste of time appointing them simultaneously. That amplified Woodward/Glazers lack of football nous.

Whether Ole is up to it or not, we'll see. But at least we know from his comments that, he wants to try & achieve success putting his faith in the young players.
 
Last edited:

Kaglish10

Full Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2019
Messages
976
Remember Mane turned us down after speaking to LVG that ones on him, maybe there were plenty of others he couldn’t convince as well.

Your saying Rashford was one of our best players and what could LVG differently, well he could have introduced Rashford earlier without injuries, he could have assessed he was better then Will Keane (failure to do that probably explains some of other mistakes).

At the end of the day this club is about more than LVG and Jose probably best you forget about both, ditch the love/hate obsession and move on. They both failed, both and sacked and neither will be back.
We were the only club that was in for Mane at the time we went in for him while Van Gaal was here but our penny pinching stopped the move hence there was no way Mane could have chosen Liverpool over us.

Maybe we went back for him the following season after Liverpool made their interest known, which isn't surprising considering Mourinho's love for hijacking players on the verge of moving to a rival club. He did it with Willian who almost moved to Spurs. Likewise, Pedro, Mikel Obi while he was at Chelsea and while he was with us, he hijacked Lukaku, Fred, Sanchez and almost did with Kante in the last minute hence same role could have played out with Mane on his move to Liverpool but while Van Gaal was here, we were the only club in for him but the move broke down because we couldn't meet Southampton's asking price.

As for Keane and Rashford, this is even lame because left for any other coach, none of these players would have been promoted in the first place. Besides, Rashford was a winger and was yet to become an established player for the u23 team. The fact that Van Gaal even promoted him says a lot about Van Gaal's boldness and trust in youth. I mean this was the same man that benched Ribery to make way for a young Muller. I don't know why he didn't do same with Rooney but I understand perfectly considering the fact that Rooney was English, had just signed a long contract and the media as well as our old guards loved him and were making excuses for his poor form, even blaming Van Gaal, it was quite difficult to drop him at the time.
 

Roboc7

Full Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2014
Messages
6,562
We were the only club that was in for Mane at the time we went in for him while Van Gaal was here but our penny pinching stopped the move hence there was no way Mane could have chosen Liverpool over us.

Maybe we went back for him the following season after Liverpool made their interest known, which isn't surprising considering Mourinho's love for hijacking players on the verge of moving to a rival club. He did it with Willian who almost moved to Spurs. Likewise, Pedro, Mikel Obi while he was at Chelsea and while he was with us, he hijacked Lukaku, Fred, Sanchez and almost did with Kante in the last minute hence same role could have played out with Mane on his move to Liverpool but while Van Gaal was here, we were the only club in for him but the move broke down because we couldn't meet Southampton's asking price.

As for Keane and Rashford, this is even lame because left for any other coach, none of these players would have been promoted in the first place. Besides, Rashford was a winger and was yet to become an established player for the u23 team. The fact that Van Gaal even promoted him says a lot about Van Gaal's boldness and trust in youth. I mean this was the same man that benched Ribery to make way for a young Muller. I don't know why he didn't do same with Rooney but I understand perfectly considering the fact that Rooney was English, had just signed a long contract and the media as well as our old guards loved him and were making excuses for his poor form, even blaming Van Gaal, it was quite difficult to drop him at the time.
Simply not true, the only time Mane was available at Southampton he spoke to LVG and turned us down, he didn’t want to play for LVG. As much as it hurts that one is all on LVG I’m afraid.

What’s lame is LVG couldn’t assess Rashford was better than Keane and that he left himself reliant on young players he has since admitted he didn’t think were good enough. Like the failure to convince Mane another of LVG’s many mistakes.
 

Aloysius's Back 3

New Member
Joined
May 21, 2018
Messages
2,770
Yep, Mourinho undone all the good work Van Gaal achieved with our young players. People wanted to believe he could bring a title back somehow. But he was never going to catch City with those players. We would have been much better off allowing him to develop the young players more in hindsight.

Who knows what other young players he would have unearthed. Martial & Rashford would have developed much more too.

It made both their tenures a waste of time appointing them simultaneously. That amplified Woodward/Glazers lack of football nous.

Whether Ole is up to it or not, we'll see. But at least we know from his comments that, he wants to try & achieve success putting his faith in the young players.
LVG played Martial first as a CF before covering for Memphis's lack of settlement at LW. He happened to find Rashford who broke through also doing well as a CF & I'm sure LVG would have atleast tried to play them in a possession based partnership if he had stayed. Memphis might have been more useful in such a situation as well. Considering he had to give up on the 352 because of the lack of players that fit that formation, I started realising in his second season that we had players like Martial, Rashford & Depay that is suited to play in a modern day partnership whilst players like Blind, TFM, Smalling could have played in a back 3 whilst some players could have played as wingbacks as well.

I liked watching CBj, Tuenzebe & TFM play rather than watching the likes of Valencia, Young or Darmian still playing for our team another 3+ years after LVG left - add Greenwood, Chong, Mctomminay and some others on to that list and our squad would surely have been younger and able to play possession football atleast to a good basic level at a time when every club seems to have a 'philosophy'.

We lacked two things under LVG -
  1. Lack of Creativity in Players - could easily be sorted by just targeting better players done by a better manager that wanted to improve LVG's style rather than completely burn the whole thing to start again.
  2. Lack of Freedom from LVG - he was clearly a dictator of holding the play back because the players weren't good enough to create things without losing the ball. He went too much with it but again something a manger like Ole or Giggs could have sorted out within one day as a manager.

Ultimately, if LVG had come after Jose failing then people would be more open to realising that LVG wasn't ever going to be a manager that wins us trophies. I look at the way the fans expectations of Ole & believe that the LVG to Homegrown coach plan would have been the best option for us. Instead we did it the other way around - went from a manager that had a plan for someone to take over a younger team to one that had the complete opposite ideas.
 
Last edited:

Kaglish10

Full Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2019
Messages
976
Simply not true, the only time Mane was available at Southampton he spoke to LVG and turned us down, he didn’t want to play for LVG. As much as it hurts that one is all on LVG I’m afraid.

What’s lame is LVG couldn’t assess Rashford was better than Keane and that he left himself reliant on young players he has since admitted he didn’t think were good enough. Like the failure to convince Mane another of LVG’s many mistakes.
Mane said he chose Liverpool ahead of us which couldn't have been true because Liverpool weren't in for him at the time Van Gaal went in for him except we went back for him in the following season.

The point is Van Gaal promoted Rashford, just like he did with Keane who was a young unproven as Rashford who wasn't even established for the u23. Hell would have frozen before Mourinho would do same. That is what matters. And yes majority of our u23 players weren't good enough. The likes of janko, McNair, Powell, Blackett, James Reece, Thorpe (all players Van Gaal gave chances) were all average. So it was true that we had a horrible youth team until the u18 came up.
 

Kapardin

New Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2017
Messages
9,917
Location
Chennai, India
Simply not true, the only time Mane was available at Southampton he spoke to LVG and turned us down, he didn’t want to play for LVG. As much as it hurts that one is all on LVG I’m afraid.

What’s lame is LVG couldn’t assess Rashford was better than Keane and that he left himself reliant on young players he has since admitted he didn’t think were good enough. Like the failure to convince Mane another of LVG’s many mistakes.
Mane literally went on strike to force a move but Koeman shut him down. It was Jose who dropped interest in him, he was willing to move to us. Then Liverpool got him and he changed his narrative of course.

Funny thing, we landed all of LvG's shite targets but missed out on what could have been a proper good signing.